KinesioTaping Reduces Pain and Modulates Sensory Function in Patients With Focal Dystonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pain is one of the most common and disabling "nonmotor" symptoms in patients with dystonia. No recent study evaluated the pharmacological or physical therapy approaches to specifically treat dystonic pain symptoms. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of KinesioTaping in patients with cervical dystonia (CD) and focal hand dystonia (FHD) on self-reported pain (primary objective) and on sensory functions (secondary objective). METHODS: Twenty-five dystonic patients (14 with CD and 11 FHD) entered a randomized crossover pilot study. The patients were randomized to 14-day treatment with KinesioTaping or ShamTaping over neck (in CD) or forearm muscles (in FHD), and after a 30-day washout period, they received the other treatment. The MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: were 3 visual analog scales (VASs) for usual pain, worst pain, and pain relief. Disease severity changes were evaluated by means of the Toronto Western Spasmodic Torticollis Rating Scale (CD) and the Writer's Cramp Rating Scale (FHD). Furthermore, to investigate possible KinesioTaping-induced effects on sensory functions, we evaluated the somatosensory temporal discrimination threshold. RESULTS: Treatment with KinesioTape induced a decrease in the subjective sensation of pain and a modification in the ability of sensory discrimination, whereas ShamTaping had no effect. A significant, positive correlation was found in both groups of patients between the improvement in the subjective sensation of pain and the reduction of somatosensory temporal discrimination threshold values induced by KinesioTaping. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary results suggest that KinesioTaping may be useful in treating pain in patients with dystonia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".